Drug Testing at the Workplace

It was in the 1980s that drug testing became popular. In the year 1986, Federal employees were banned from using drugs as per the executive order signed by the then President Ronald Reagan. This was followed by the Drug-Free Workplace Act that in 1988 stated it illegal for Federal employees to engage in drug abuse irrespective of whether or not they were on duty. This act led to the creation of similar law making in almost all the states of America. Several large American corporations also decided to adopt this procedure and since then, drug testing has been an important condition for employment.

Several opposers of drug testing at the workplace don’t consider this to be a favorable practice. While accepting and acknowledging that employers’ concerns about employees abusing drugs is valid, they believe drug testing is an outright violation of employee privacy. This especially holds true for employees like office workers who aren’t in positions that require the use of heavy machinery. There doesn’t seem to be an end to this debate in the foreseeable future. While employers are continuing to make the most of their rights by making drug testing mandatory for prospective employees, opposing employees will go on arguing against an invasion of their privacy.
Workplace Drug Testing and Its Consequences

The stress levels prevalent in today’s society make it more vulnerable to the abuse of alcohol and drugs. It has already resulted in the youth consuming more than their share of alcohol and illegal drugs. Data for the year of 2007, released by the US SAMHSA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration) revealed that 11,891 users between the ages of 21-25 years and 19,977 users between the ages of 26-34 were found to be positive for such illegal drugs as cocaine, hashish, marijuana, etc. To combat this problem across the globe, the United Nations has introduced many measures including workplace drug testing.

Former US President, Ronald Reagan insisted that drug tests at the workplace were essential to ensure a productive work environment that was also drug free. Several other governments across the world have also adopted this method of fighting against drug use as opposed to fighting against the supply of drugs because the latter was not yielding adequate results. Numerous organizations have enforced drug tests in an attempt to increase productivity of the employees, reduce absenteeism and healthcare costs borne by them, improve safety conditions for employees and create a working environment that is free of drug abuse. Employers have the right to withhold or cut back employee compensation amounts, if there’s evidence that illegal substance abuse was the cause of the injury.

Justifications

Legal and significant reasons are essential to justify workplace drug tests. This measure aims at increasing the safety quotient of the working environment, increasing organizational efficacy, ensuring the welfare of employees, reducing the risk of loss of reputation, etc. Many corporations in several countries world-wide have adopted this measure to adversely impact the increasing demand for illegal drugs, to protect the health of employees, to promote a safe workplace, to increase efficacy and levels of public safety, to create an honest relationship between workers and employers and to reduce healthcare costs to the employers. Workplace drug testing is also justified for the drop it results in, in terms of damages suffered in relation to accidents that take place both at the workplace as well as on the streets. Regardless, workplace drug testing can be dismissed if employees continue to argue and plea against it. Drug tests are justified by pointing out that it benefits the individual and the society by enhancing overall safety.

Workers’ Civil Rights

Drug testing at the workplace is a sore issue as it originates from a conflict between the interests of the workers and their employers. Though various types of methods are used to administer these tests, they are all controversial. Random drug tests, however, have the earned the most disfavor. The results of these drug tests can lead to both legal and ethical issues including the firing of employees. Tests done without the concerned employee’s consent are deemed illegal as they violate his/ her right to privacy. The Privacy Act of 1983 stipulates that only essential information that relates directly to the program should be taken into consideration and accuracy of the results must be ensured. Each individual is guaranteed the freedom of speech, equal protection by the law as well as protection from illegal discrimination, as per The Civil Rights Act, 1964 (as defined in the US Constitution). A few corporations make of drug tests to determine whom to employ. Those who fail these tests are denied jobs. This has been debated on the basis of the above mentioned Civil Rights Act, 1964. Most organizations get employees to sign contracts which state that they will be terminated, or will not be remunerated, if they are found positive post a drug test. These contractual stipulations effectively take away an employee’s right to raise the issue in a court of law. Many permanent employees have been subjected to treatment for substance abuse because of their drug test results. In 2006, the DASIS Report revealed that the percentage of permanent employees admitted to rehab centers for treatment of substance abuse issues was higher (58%) as compared to that of unemployed substance abusers (39%). There are some countries and states that promote drug free workplaces by covering the expenses the employer might incur by employing an individual who is an abuser of illegal substances.

Who should be tested?

Organizations need to have a clear cut method of identifying the employees who’ll undergo drug testing. They should also be equally clear about the kind of substances they are looking for. These criteria may include all employees or those that have newly been appointed, employees that belong to unions, those suspected of abusing illicit substances, etc. Organizations may also base their criteria on whether the impairment caused by a drug is related to past or current use. They may, in addition, include instances wherein an employee provides enough reason to suspect that he/she may be on illicit drugs which have resulted in noticeable impairment of their skills. The best method advisable for drug testing is one that’s inclusive. This not only takes care of the danger of discrimination but also helps employees overcome hesitation. Several organizations around the world have adopted the random and inclusive form of drug testing to deal with the issue of workplace drug abuse, improve employee safety and reduce company costs and they’ve reaped positive results. A case in point is the State of Ohio which employed this method and then noticed a significant drop in absenteeism, reduced number of supervisor related issues and a massive 97% drop in work related injuries. These impressive statistics are proving to be inspirational for other states to adopt drug testing. It is essential that such strict measures be taken to control drug abuse.